Corporate social responsibility in tourism and hospitality...EDITORIAL Corporate social...

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttps://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rsus20

Journal of Sustainable Tourism

ISSN: 0966-9582 (Print) 1747-7646 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rsus20

Corporate social responsibility in tourism andhospitality

Xavier Font & Jennifer Lynes

To cite this article: Xavier Font & Jennifer Lynes (2018) Corporate social responsibilityin tourism and hospitality, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 26:7, 1027-1042, DOI:10.1080/09669582.2018.1488856

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2018.1488856

Published online: 03 Sep 2018.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 5603

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 1 View citing articles

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rsus20https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rsus20https://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/09669582.2018.1488856https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2018.1488856https://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=rsus20&show=instructionshttps://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=rsus20&show=instructionshttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/mlt/10.1080/09669582.2018.1488856https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/mlt/10.1080/09669582.2018.1488856http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1080/09669582.2018.1488856&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2018-09-03http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1080/09669582.2018.1488856&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2018-09-03https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/citedby/10.1080/09669582.2018.1488856#tabModulehttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/citedby/10.1080/09669582.2018.1488856#tabModule

EDITORIAL

Corporate social responsibility in tourism and hospitality

ABSTRACTThe past decade has seen significant growth in the tourism and hospi-tality literature on corporate social responsibility (CSR). Indeed, over70% of the articles on this topic have been published in the past fiveyears. Through the application of a stakeholder lens, this paper exploreshow CSR has developed within the extant literature, paying particularattention to current gaps and highlighting the contributions of theresearch in this special issue. This emerging research on CSR in the con-text of tourism and hospitality is pushing past the boundaries of earlyapproaches to corporate sustainability by providing empirical evidenceto support the importance of integrating a range of stakeholder per-spectives and needs throughout the planning, implementation, andevaluation of CSR initiatives. We observe that while there is ampleresearch on certain stakeholder groups such as management, employ-ees, shareholders, and consumers, there is less emphasis on the role ofcommunities and ecosystems as stakeholders and very little related tosuppliers, NGOs, and government. Although tourism and hospitalityfirms may not be subject to the same pressures as other industries,there remain important opportunities to both document and engagethese external stakeholders in the journey towards sustainability.

ARTICLE HISTORYReceived 5 April 2018Accepted 4 June 2018

KEYWORDSTourism; hospitality;stakeholders; corporatesocial responsibility;accountability; sustainability

Introduction

In 1983, an environmental activist by the name of Jay Westerveld was travelling in the Pacificislands when he came across a placard in a hotel asking guests to reuse their towels for the sakeof the environment. Westerveld saw this request from the hotel not as a gesture of altruism butrather, as a way for the hotel to save money – not the planet. A few years later, Westerveld pub-lished an essay based on this experience in which he coined the term “greenwashing” (Watson,2016). Despite this early dialogue on the motivations for corporate social responsibility (CSR) inhospitality and tourism, it would take another three decades for academic research in this areato really get underway.

Indeed, it has only been in the last 10 years that we have started to see significant growth inthis literature. In 2006, there were no articles published on CSR in tourism and hospitality; in2007 there were two papers (Holcomb et al., 2007; Merwe & Wocke, 2007) and by 2016 the num-ber of publications peaked at 88. In fact, a search of the Web of Science database for refereedbooks or articles that self-identified as being related to either CSR, corporate sustainability, cor-porate responsibility, or corporate social and environmental responsibility AND either tourism orhospitality (including research related to airlines, cruise ships, and restaurants) reveals that 366articles have been published in journals and refereed conference proceedings on this subject,and over 70% of all articles on this subject have been published in the past five years (seeFigure 1). Broadly, the focus of this paper is to take stock of the extant CSR literature in the

Color versions of one or more of the figures in the article can be found online at www.tandfonline.com/rsus.� 2018 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group

JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE TOURISM2018, VOL. 26, NO. 7, 1027–1042https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2018.1488856

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1080/09669582.2018.1488856&domain=pdfhttp://www.tandfonline.com/rsushttps://doi.org./10.1080/09669582.2018.1488856http://www.tandfonline.com

disciplines of hospitality and tourism to critically explore how it has progressed and to drawinsights into where it should be further developed in the future. More specifically, this paperpositions the research included in this special issue in the context of existing literature, highlight-ing the gaps in knowledge that they address and the novel contributions that they offer.

As the content of the articles in this special issue took shape, we observed an unplanned yetdistinct common thread that wove these pieces together: an emphasis on the fundamental rolethat stakeholders play within a firm’s CSR practises. This thread aligns nicely with Carroll’s 2016reflection on his original CSR pyramid of CSR, in which he notes several recent appeals in the lit-erature to redefine CSR from “corporate social responsibility”, to “corporate stakeholderresponsibility”. It is, thus, through the lens of “stakeholders” that we critically examine how previ-ous research on CSR in tourism and hospitality aligns with this current issue.

The concept of CSR has evolved since the 1950s, as society has placed greater expectationson companies (Carroll, 1999). The evolution of definitions of CSR has been shaped by how it issocially constructed (Dahlsrud, 2008). Rather than repeating well established definitions, it isworth relating the subject of this journal and its focus on sustainable tourism with the conceptof CSR. The World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED), typically known asthe Brundtland Commission, defined sustainable development as meeting the current society’sneeds without compromising the ability of future generations to do so. Sustainability, therefore,is the aim of both this journal and this special issue. Responsibility is the human response tothat aim: it is a (relative) choice in relation to, firstly, accepting that sustainability is importantand secondly, deciding which initiatives, activities, and other changes one is willing to undertakein response. Response(ability) relates to activities pursued to achieve a social good and per-formed to meet social requirements (McWilliams & Siegel, 2001; Perrini, 2006).

Responsibility is embedded within the five dimensions of CSR that are common to most defi-nitions (Dahlsrud, 2008) and is linked to the concept of stakeholders. CSR is described as a pro-cess whereby individuals identify stakeholder demands on their organisations and negotiatetheir level of responsibility towards the collective wellbeing of society, environment, and econ-omy (Dahlsrud, 2008). Such a description highlights that responsibility is socially constructed byorganisations engaged in CSR. The degree to which an organisation acknowledges responsibilitytowards society determines how proactive their approach to CSR is and, therefore, the pro-activ-ity of a stakeholder. It also determines whether their actions contribute towards shared well-being, depending on whether these actions are motivated by seeking benefits to oneself, toothers, or to the biosphere (De Groot & Steg, 2008; Schultz, 2001). Under this conception of CSR

1 28

1116

1922 22

5246

88

79

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2004 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Figure 1. Number of published articles related to CSR and either tourism or hospitality.

1028 X. FONT AND J. LYNES

stakeholders, and their relation to organisations engaged in CSR, lie key indicators of responsibil-ity for individual CSR strategies. In short, by looking at how CSR strategies define and engagestakeholders, one can determine how inclusive and proactive a strategy is, as well as the breadthof its application (i.e. whom may benefit, and to what degree they will benefit, from its imple-mentation). Figure 2 depicts the range of external and internal stakeholders that may be consid-ered as part of a firm’s CSR practices. Stakeholders in the unshaded boxes (i.e. consumers,shareholders, management, and employees) are prominently discussed in tourism literature onCSR; stakeholders in the textured boxes (i.e. communities and ecosystems) are moderately butnot widely discussed; and stakeholders in the shaded boxes (i.e. suppliers, NGOs and govern-ment) are virtually untouched in the literature.

Previous studies have mapped out the CSR literature in tourism and hospitality (e.g. Aragon-Correa, Martin-Tapia, & de la Torre-Ruiz, 2015; Coles, Fenclova, & Dinan, 2014; Farrington, Curran,Gori, O’Gorman, & Queenan, 2017). These studies have found that the lens used to study CSR isoften determined by the reasons one has for investigating the practice, ranging from CSR as atool for raising corporate profits, improving political performance, or increasing stakeholderaccountability, through to CSR as a means for studying the ethics of decision-making (Garriga &Mel�e�e, 2004). There is also agreement that there has been disproportionate attention paid toCSR as a tool for enhancing economic gain and corporate legitimacy.

In the spirit of providing a different (stakeholder centric) lens, this article is structured as follows.Accepting that CSR is a social construction, we start with a comprehensive literature review of CSRin the tourism and hospitality sector, presenting five sections that explore what CSR means to dif-ferent stakeholder groups. We first review the meaning of CSR as stakeholder accountability in itsbroadest sense. We then consider what CSR means for the “elephant in the room” that guides allCSR activities: the shareholder (see Friedman, 1970 for more on the relationship between share-holders and social responsibility). We continue by examining how CSR is enacted by organisationalmanagement in order to deliver on the organisation’s strategy, as well as how this is mediated bythe organisation’s culture. This is followed by what CSR means to employees and how it is associ-ated with human resources management, before moving on to the role of consumers and howthe organisation deploys persuasive marketing and communication efforts. Discussion of the roleof communities and ecosystems as stakeholders remains an under-represented component of theresearch on stakeholders. Readers may observe the absence of discussion related to governments

Figure 2. Overview of external and internal stakeholders related to a firm’s CSR practices.

JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE TOURISM 1029

and NGOs in this paper. This is because the tourism literature has paid little attention to theirpotential role in nudging tourism firms to be more responsible.

Overview of the literature

Society: stakeholder accountability

The real meaning of the S in CSR is that companies have a responsibility towards ensuring thatall aspects of the business have a positive impact on our society. Currently, it appears that com-panies are making superficial changes to appear to be more sustainable, perhaps because stake-holders are not sufficiently well-organised to demand change (Coles, Fenclova, & Dinan, 2011;Dodds & Kuehnel, 2010; Weaver, 2014). Industry surveys provide some explanations for the rela-tively poor quality of CSR engagement. Despite having a good understanding of the term CSR,members of the Travel Industry Association of America (TIA) implement primarily environmentalrather than sociocultural CSR actions, mostly for reputational reasons (Sheldon & Park, 2011). UKairlines use self-serving language to justify their actions (Burns & Cowlishaw, 2014), and UK con-ference venues undertake eco-savings or tokenistic CSR activities (Whitfield & Dioko, 2012).

It is clear that increasing the accountability of sustainability practices improves CSR engage-ment. Merwe and Wocke (2007) reported that the membership of South African “responsibletourism” associations increased the practice and communication of CSR actions in the region,although arguably not to the extent that may have been desired. In Malaysia, we find bothendogenous and exogenous antecedents for primarily social CSR actions in local hotel chains(Abaeian, Yeoh, & Khong, 2014). Even those companies that believe that sustainability is import-ant find that dedicating time to it, and the cost of acting more responsibly, both make compa-nies less competitive (Frey & George, 2010). These findings suggest that improving CSR practices,especially those related to sustainability, will require stakeholders to become more effective atlobbying for industry-wide acknowledgement of the importance of social and environmentalresponsibilities towards society.

Ideally, CSR measurement scales would be grounded in a detailed understanding of whatstakeholders expect from each business in relation to the context in which it operates, howeverthe reality is rarely quite as straightforward (Mart�ınez, P�erez, & Rodr�ıguez del Bosque, 2013). Forexample, Macao’s gambling industry engages only symbolically with CSR activities, emphasisingthe economic contribution the industry makes to the destination while turning a blind eye tothe social issues of gambling addiction, and environmental impacts (Leung & Snell, 2017).Stakeholders themselves often see CSR as secondary to business as usual. A study about the CSRof a Taiwanese airport, for instance, found that safety and security, service quality, and corporategovernance were prioritised by stakeholders over criteria related to either environmental man-agement, or employee and work environment management (Chang & Yeh, 2016). In general,consumers believe that long-term sustainable economic practices are more central to a business’CSR programme than its social and environmental dimensions (Mart�ınez et al., 2013).

CSR reports are an excellent tool for gauging what companies believe their responsibility istowards society, as well as how they act on perceived obligations. Only 18 out of the 50 largest hotelgroups in the world, and 12 out of 80 cruise companies, provide CSR reports that contain environ-mental, social, and economic information (Bonilla-Priego, Font, & Pacheco, 2014; Guix, Bonilla-Priego,& Font, 2017). The literature indicates a lack of consistency in CSR accounting methodologies, thescope of reporting, and the activities undertaken (Bonilla-Priego et al., 2014; Burns & Cowlishaw,2014; de Grosbois, 2012; Holcomb, Upchurch, & Okumus, 2007). This results in a significant gapbetween stated CSR commitments, actual practices, and the quality of data shared with stakeholders(de Grosbois, 2012; Font, Walmsley, Cogotti, McCombes, & H€ausler, 2012). Moreover, there are gapsin the information provided to employees, suppliers and shareholders in relation to, for example,information transparency, labour rights, human rights, and sustainability in supplier relations (Perez &


Rodr�ıguez Del Bosque, 2014). All of these gaps exist because CSR reports tend to reflect the prioritiesof the companies that prepare them, and not the expectations placed on those companies by theirstakeholders (Font, Guix, & Bonilla-Priego, 2016).

Two articles in this special issue contribute to the stakeholder accountability literature.Ringham and Miles (2018) study the “boundary” of activities stakeholders may expect a companyto report on, in other words, the perceived limits of an organisation’s accountability. Thisincludes, for example, the choices made about the type of impacts considered, as well as thescope of the organisation (Ringham & Miles, 2018). Previous research has shown that hotelgroups choose not to include franchised hotels in the scope of their CSR activities and subse-quent reports, due to having lower management control over them, despite stakeholders’expectations that CSR reporting would include all establishments under a given brand (Melissen,van Ginneken, & Wood, 2016). Ringham and Miles (2018) find that the airline industry defines itsCSR responsibility rather narrowly and conveniently, without taking into account stakeholderexpectations. They also find that the companies claiming to have a stricter level of CSR compli-ance set themselves a narrower organisational scope. The second article in this issue to explorestakeholder accountability is Guix et al. (2017), which considers the opacity of the reporting ofthe processes used by companies. The authors focus on hotel groups to account for the stake-holders that are identified and engaged as relevant to determining CSR programmes, as well asthe scant information available relating to how CSR reports respond to stakeholder expectations.

Shareholders: the quest for corporate financial performance

Companies have defined CSR as secondary to the business growth imperative (Jones, Hillier, &Comfort, 2016). In response, a multitude of studies have attempted to identify which aspects ofpositive or negative CSR management and performance have an impact, or mediating effect, onmeasures of short- and long-term corporate financial performance (CFP) (see for example Inoue& Lee, 2011; Kang, Lee, & Hug, 2010; Leonidou, Leonidou, Fotiadis, & Zeriti, 2012; Lee & Heo,2009; Lee & Park, 2009; Pereira-Moliner, Claver-Cort�es, Molina-Azor�ın, & Tar�ı�ı, 2012; Pereira-Moliner et al., 2015; S.-B. Kim & D.-Y. Kim, 2014; Singal, 2014). In fact, this subject has been themost researched aspect of CSR in the tourism and hospitality industries (Farrington et al., 2017),yet the results have been inconclusive (Kang et al., 2010; Pereira-Moliner et al., 2015).

Part of the complexity of studying the CSR–corporate financial performance (CSR-CFP) rela-tionship is that CSR is not a homogeneous construct. Hence, several studies have considered CSRas an aggregate variable (Nicolau, 2008) and have therefore investigated its individual compo-nents, such as environmental practices (Pereira-Moliner et al., 2012) or corporate charitable giv-ing (Chen & Lin, 2015). Others have studied multiple CSR elements in parallel, such as employeerelations, product quality, community relations, environmental, and diversity issues (Inoue & Lee,2011). The relative impacts, or efficacy, of CSR measures also depend on the company and itscontextual variables. For example, CSR appears to influence CFP differently depending on a firm’ssize (Youn, Hua, & Lee, 2015), managerial ownership (Paek, Xiao, Lee, & Song, 2013), top manage-ment gender (Quintana-Garc�ıa, Marchante-Lara, & Benavides-Chic�on, 2017), familial control(Singal, 2014), and geographical diversification (Park, Song, & Lee, 2017). Further, we find thatduring recessionary periods, non-operations related CSR practices cause a substantial decline infirm value, while operations-related CSR have a positive impact (Lee, Singal, & Kang, 2013).As the literature has evolved, more recent studies have provided empirical evidence to explainthe interrelationships between a firm’s CSR initiatives, stakeholders groups, and financial perform-ance. Theodoulidis, Diaz, Crotto, and Rancati (2017) conducted one of the most comprehensiveaccounts of this literature to justify the disaggregation of CSR, and to relate CSR to concernsfrom specific stakeholder groups. They consider how CRS relates to the use of strategic andintrinsic stakeholder models as explanatory frameworks, as well as to the use of both short- and


long-term corporate financial performance data, in order to test their model in multiple subsec-tors of tourism. What all these studies have in common is the use of mainstream management,economics literature, and quantitative methods to explain patterns in CSR–CFP.

Three articles in this special issue contribute to the topic of CSR from a shareholder perspective(Horng, Hsu, & Tsai, 2017; Jung, Kim, Kang, & Kim, 2018; Wang, Xu, & Li, 2018). Horng et al. (2017)develop a multiple attribute decision-making model to determine the causal relations and theweight of the attributes of CSR. They also present an influential network relations map to aid deci-sion-making to deploy resources and reach optimal CSR performance, based on experts’ under-standings of the impacts and influences between items. Next, Jung et al. (2018) theorise that aspart of a firm’s internationalisation strategy, CSR activities have the opportunity to contribute toimage formation and adaptation to local markets, hence working to reduce a firm’s systematic risk.Their results show that while socially responsible CSR actions did not have a moderating effectbetween internationalisation and systematic risk, socially-irresponsible activities did: to reduce sys-tematic risk from internationalisation, firms must therefore address any activities that are perceivedas irresponsible, in relation to consumers’ health, environment, and social issues. Wang et al. (2018)found that tourist attractions engage more in corporate philanthropy than do other tourism firms.In this context, philanthropy is used to redress economic imbalance, unsustainable use of resourcesdue to fierce competition and/or low access to education. For tourist attractions, philanthropytherefore becomes a tool for enhancing legitimacy, smoothing community relations, and improvingcorporate image in locations where there is a high power imbalance between large tourist attrac-tions, the local community, and the tourism businesses that depend on the attraction.

Management: CSR, strategy and organisational culture

A third strand of the literature studies how managers negotiate trade-offs in implementing CSR(Hahn, Figge, Pinkse, & Preuss, 2010). Organisations will naturally seek the most cost-effectiveway of achieving their CSR objectives, and therefore the actions they implement will vary accord-ing to whether their motivations to engage in CSR are based on profit, legitimation or altruism(Font, Garay, & Jones, 2016b). We know that companies tend to implement actions that will leadto efficiency gains that can be quantified, while they pay less attention to the more ambiguoussocio-economic potential gains (Font & Harris, 2004; Jones, Hillier, & Comfort, 2014; Kasim,Gursoy, Okumus, & Wong, 2014; Levy & Park, 2011).

There is an understanding that the CSR–CFP relationship looks like an inverted U curve,whereby increases in a firm’s social responsibility lead to improved financial performance; how-ever, there also comes a point when further increases in responsibility are actually detrimental toa firm’s overall financial performance. The optimal balance between CSR and CFP is somethingthat few articles address (Chen & Lin, 2015). There are reasons to believe that businesses withmore altruistic motivations worry less about the return on investment per se: for example, Garayand Font (2012) found that businesses with a higher CSR performance tend to have a higherlevel of satisfaction with their current CFP, even though it is actually similar to that of their com-petitors. Hence, we need to understand how CSR is enacted according to organisational cultureand values. Studies have shown that small firms are more likely to take CSR actions for altruisticand social capital reasons, rather than commercial reasons, when compared to large firms; theiractions will also be more ad hoc and less strategic (Font, Garay, & Jones, 2016a; Garay & Font,2012). Global tourism firms, on the other hand, struggle to operationalise their centralised CSRstrategies in a way that is sensitive to different local contexts (Smith & Ong, 2015). Therefore,they tend to centralise the environmental, cost efficiency driven indicators, while allowing eachindividual hotel to have social programmes that are typically not quantified beyond philan-thropic donations. The literature shows that tourism firms tend to get the most benefits (finan-cial or otherwise) from CSR actions that are strategic and genuine, and less so when these are


tactical and reactive (Prud’homme & Raymond, 2013). There is evidence that the joint introduc-tion of total quality management and CSR activities provides benefits to stakeholders, which inturn positively affects hotel performance (Benavides-Velasco, Quintana-Garc�ıa, & Marchante-Lara,2014). The need for strategic approaches is also evident in sustainable supply chain manage-ment, which requires stakeholder collaborations and long-term strategic partnerships to deliveroperational improvements (Xu & Gursoy, 2015; Zhang, Joglekar, & Verma, 2012).

Organisational priorities explain why chain hotels are more likely to implement low cost CSRpractices compared to independent hotels (Rahman, Reynolds, & Svaren, 2012). There is a tendencyto internalise CSR activities that can be seen as a core part of the business (such as those leadingto operational savings and aspects of personnel management), while outsourcing CSR actions thatare not part of the core business (such as those providing community and broader environmentalbenefits) (Smith & Ong, 2015). This is because partnering with local stakeholders allows tourismbusinesses to cost-effectively access knowhow and externalise fixed costs and responsibilities, whilealso gaining visibility that legitimises their businesses. It is a shame that there are few publishedexamples of how individual organisations go about introducing CSR programmes that are appro-priate to the organisational culture of the organisation, and even less information about the unin-tended consequences of well-meaning CSR programmes (Bohdanowicz & Zientara, 2008).

This understanding of CSR organisational climate and the relation between organisational andpersonal CSR values is key to understanding CSR successes and challenges. An organisation’s cul-ture towards CSR moderates between personal CSR norms and behaviour between firms, whilepersonal CSR values moderate the variations in behaviour within firms (Chou, 2014; El Dief & Font,2011; Wells, Smith, Taheri, Manika, & McCowlen, 2016). Lin, Yu, and Chang (2018), for instance,found that young companies were more active in CSR than established companies, even when thelatter employed younger and more educated managers who personally acknowledged having posi-tive attitudes towards sustainability. Chou (2014, p. 436) similarly determined that “personal envir-onmental norms explain within-hotel variance, but green organisational climates explain between-hotel variance and moderate the effect of personal environmental norms on employees’ environ-mental behaviour”. Further, Lin et al. (2018) discussed how managers’ altruistic attitudes, as well asan appreciation of the benefits to the company, predicted CSR practices in Taiwanese tour opera-tors, while their choices of CSR practices were also informed by their understanding of subjectivenorms and their perceptions of their own abilities to succeed. Finally, Lee, Lee, and Li (2012) foundthat both the economic and philanthropic dimensions of CSR positively influence an employee’strust in their organisation, however only the ethical dimensions of CSR have a positive effect on anemployees’ job satisfaction; the legal dimension has no influence. What these articles have in com-mon is showing that organisations with a genuine belief in sustainability create organisational cli-mates that empower staff to take ownership for relevant CSR actions.

Within this special issue, there are three contributions to the literature on negotiating CSRactions within an organisational strategy. Kallmuenzer, Nikolakis, Peters, and Zanon (2017) usesocio-emotional wealth and random-utility theory to explain why, after meeting financial require-ments, Austrian rural tourism family firms gain greater utility from ecological and social out-comes than they do from higher profit outcomes. Their contribution is also methodological asthey are the first study to use conjoint analysis, a choice-method survey, to study CSR pay-offsas well as the trade-offs between different CSR attributes. Buijtendijk, Blom, and Vermeer (2018)report on the industry co-construction of sustainability innovations and the choices resultingfrom environmental and social trade-offs that arise due to these innovations. They use Actor-Network Theory as an analytical tool to study how stakeholders engage with each other in orderto develop sustainable tourism innovations and to negotiate the outcomes and implications ofsuch innovations. A further contribution to the literature on CSR, strategy, and organisational cul-ture comes from Vila, Afsordegan, Agell, S�anchez, and Costa (2018), who put forward a fuzzyDelphi technique using linguistic scales to develop a consensus on sustainable tourism indicatorsin relation to water allocation. This is the only article in this special issue that considers


destination-wide negotiations of responsibility towards the appropriate management of resour-ces for tourism, residents, and nature.

Employees: CSR and human resources management

A strategy that creates the appropriate organisational culture to nurture CSR must enable theorganisation’s employees to feel that they identify with the organisation’s values, and to act ontheir own pro-sustainability personal values (Wells et al., 2016). The role that management staffand personnel play in the implementation of CSR programmes is gaining attention in the tour-ism and hospitality literature (Bohdanowicz, Zientara, & Novotna, 2011; Chou, 2014; Lee et al.,2012; Lynes & Andrachuk, 2008). Managers’ leadership styles, and their understanding of CSR,affect how they encourage their employees to engage in CSR activities (Mackenzie & Peters,2014) as a result of their influence on the organisation’s identity and commitment (Fu, Ye, &Law, 2014). Tsai, Tsang, and Cheng (2012), for example, found that both employees and manag-ers in Hong Kong have a low level of environmental awareness and (potentially as a conse-quence) a high level of satisfaction with their employer’s current CSR effectiveness. Gainingemployee affective emotional commitment, innovation, and customer loyalty impact positivelyon the relationship between CSR and CFP (Wang, 2014).

A social marketing experiment that attempted to change employee behaviour showed theneed for managers to plan CSR strategies that increase staff knowledge and awareness, but payequal attention to staff motivation, self-efficacy and information adequacy (Wells, Manika,Gregory-Smith, Taheri, & McCowlen, 2015). Employee awareness of, and engagement with, CSRactivities is directly related to job satisfaction, engagement, and voice behaviour, and negativelyrelated to job exhaustion (Raub & Blunschi, 2014). It has been shown to stimulate work engage-ment, career satisfaction, and voice behaviour (Ilkhanizadeh & Karatepe, 2017), to positively influ-ence organisational identification (Park & E. Levy, 2014), and to enhance quality of working life,affective commitment, and organisational citizenship behaviour (Kim, Rhou, Uysal, & Kwon,2017). However, despite positive attitudes towards CSR, small and large firms alike, in developedand developing countries, report similar barriers to acting on these attitudes, including lack oftime, money, support, and customer demand (Frey & George, 2010; Garay & Font, 2013). At hotellevel, staff usually have CSR responsibilities as an addition to their main job, and this determinesthe way that CSR is interpreted in the organisation, with a preference for engineeringapproaches to efficient management of facilities (Geerts, 2014). Hence, the importance of CSRtask significance, which is the degree to which employees believe that their job has a positiveimpact on the lives of others (Raub & Blunschi, 2014).

This special issue includes three contributions to the study of CSR and employee behaviour,also drawing connections to the impact of organisational culture. Zientara and Zamojska (2016)present a study of how green organisational climate affects organisational citizenship behaviour.They develop a multilevel approach to studying employee roles in green organisational behav-iour, considering the role of individuals within departments, within organisations, and withinorganisational contexts. This nested understanding of behaviour allows them to better under-stand the ability of personal, organisational, and contextual factors to influence organisationalcitizenship behaviour. Similarly, Mart�ınez Garc�ıa de Leaniz, Herrero Crespo, and G�omez L�opez(2017) find multiple relationships between organisational green practices, green image, environ-mental consciousness, and the behavioural intentions of customers. Finally, Tuan (2017) showsthat there are interactive, multidirectional, and amplifying influences between organisationalCSR, employee pro-environmental citizenship, and tourists’ pro-environmental citizenship, whichhe explains using social identity theory. Collectively, these studies demonstrate that organisationsmake better decisions when they understand CSR as being central to their DNA rather thanmerely as a legitimisation tool (Husted & Allen, 2007). They share methods to determine the fit


between corporate strategy and CSR choices (Tsai, Hsu, Chen, Lin, & Chen, 2010). They also showthat not only are CSR actions more successfully implemented when they are well embedded inorganisational culture, but enacting this culture through CSR helps to further consolidate theorganisational culture (Mart�ınez, P�erez, & Rodr�ıguez del Bosque, 2014).

Consumers: marketing and communication

It is essential to engage both employees and customers in order to co-create meaningful sustain-ability experiences (Zhang et al., 2012), remembering that both stakeholder groups are moti-vated by self-interest (Wong & Gao, 2014). Guests, however, are rarely engaged in the design ofCSR strategies (Moscardo & Hughes, 2018). Tourists’ own interpretations of CSR vary considerablydepending on their inner versus outer directed goals and the role that responsibility has as partof their self-identity (Caruana, Glozer, Crane, & McCabe, 2014). Also, we know that consumers areconsiderably more environmentally friendly at home than in hotel settings, and that their rea-sons for pro-environmental behaviour are normative at home, but hedonic on holiday (Miao &Wei, 2013). Hedonism may explain why positive (but not negative) emotions on environmentallyresponsible behaviour have a mediating role between destination social responsibility and envir-onmentally responsible behaviour (Su & Swanson, 2017). Baker, Davis, and Weaver (2014) foundthat consumers boycott hotels’ environmental actions that are perceived to lead to inconveni-ence, cost cutting, and loss of luxury. Altruistic CSR communications to consumers that focus onpreventing something negative from happening work well, whereas both altruistic and strategicCSR communications that promote a positive outcome are received similarly well by consumers(Kim, Kim, & Mattila, 2017).

While customers expect to receive a benefit for themselves from engaging in CSR activities(Wong & Gao, 2014), they are also sceptical about environmental claims for which they recognisean ulterior motive of the hotel, affecting their intention to support the hotel’s CSR programmeand to revisit the establishment (Rahman, Park, & Chi, 2015). Corporate values impact the con-sumer’s engagement, as well as consumer expectations of different business models: CSR has apositive synergistic effect with service quality for full service airlines and a negative effect for lowcost airlines (Seo, Moon, & Lee, 2015). While CSR mostly influences the affective dimension ofbrand image, the functional image mostly influences brand loyalty (Mart�ınez, P�erez, & delBosque, 2014). Trust, customer identification with the company, and satisfaction are thereforemediators between CSR and customer loyalty (Mart�ınez & Rodr�ıguez del Bosque, 2013).

Often larger firms initially engage in CSR to manage their image, brand, and corporate sys-tematic risk (Jung et al., 2016; Levy & Park, 2011; M. Kim & Y. Kim, 2014; Miller, 2001; Tsai et al.,2010), subsequently realising the complexities of communicating their CSR efforts, exemplified inboth the use of social marketing (Truong & Hall, 2017) and certification (Geerts, 2014). Thisresults in small businesses “greenhushing” – that is, deliberately under-communicating their sus-tainability actions (Font, Elgammal, & Lamond, 2017). However, recent evidence shows that thebenefits achieved from engaging in CSR are more than reversed if the CSR activity is discontin-ued (Li, Fang, & Huan, 2017). Therefore, communication of CSR actions needs to be more stra-tegic and less ad hoc, and must consider the likely consumer responses, in relation to both whatis communicated and how (Font & McCabe, 2017; Villarino & Font, 2015; Zhang, 2014). A goodrecent review on sustainability communication in tourism was written by T€olkes (2018).

When sustainability benefits and responsibility actions are persuasively communicated, theycan positively affect consumer satisfaction. In return, this raises the likelihood to repeat business(Jarvis, Stoeckl, & Liu, 2016), contributes to service recovery (Albus & Ro, 2017; Siu, Zhang, &Kwan, 2014), increases customer loyalty (Mart�ınez Garc�ıa de Leaniz & Rodr�ıguez Del BosqueRodr�ıguez, 2015; P�erez & Rodriguez del Bosque, 2015), and creates positive word-of-mouth andresistance to negative information (Xie, Bagozzi, & Gr�nhaug, 2015). Through effective


communication, CSR positively affects perceptions of corporate reputation and customer satisfac-tion, and positively impacts customer commitment and behaviour, particularly amongst peoplewith a higher income (Su, Pan, & Chen, 2017). Consumer motivations towards responsible tour-ism, together with their perceptions of both the destination visited and the brand of the oper-ator used, also shape their attitudes and loyalties towards the operator chosen (Mody, Day,Sydnor, Lehto, & Jaff�e�e, 2017). Construal level theory suggests that consumers respond best tomessages that are congruent with: (i) what sustainability means to them (Line, Hanks, & Zhang,2016), (ii) their processing fluency and psychological distance (Zhang, 2014), and (iii) the corepurpose of that business (Kim & Ham, 2016).

In summary, there are very good reasons to further research how to better market and com-municate CSR. For example, previous studies have demonstrated that image is an importantmotivator for firms to adopt CSR practices, and there is evidence to support the mediating roleof trust between image and customer loyalty. In this special issue, Palacios-Florencio, Garc�ıa delJunco, Castellanos-Verdugo, and Rosa-D�ıaz (2018) expand on the theoretical and empirical evi-dence regarding how customer trust acts as a mediator between CSR and image and loyalty, ini-tiated by Mart�ınez and Rodr�ıguez del Bosque (2013). This research shows that customers aremore inclined to believe that responsible companies operate honestly in their activities and aremore willing to enter into relationships with firms that develop socially responsible initiatives.Furthermore, Moscardo and Hughes (2018) outline 10 strategies to close the consumer’s attitu-de–behaviour gap towards CSR using literature from tourist interpretation, social marketing andsustainability marketing. Their paper offers valuable recommendations for businesses, and usefulguidance on avenues of further research. These studies reinforce the need for customers to notonly understand what actions firms are taking with respect to CSR but more importantly to bothbelieve and trust that these actions are legitimate.

Conclusions

Through the application of a stakeholder lens, this paper explores how CSR has developed withinthe tourism and hospitality literature, paying particular attention to current gaps in the literatureand highlighting how the papers presented in this special issue offer novel and timely contribu-tions to this field of study. Specifically, five key contributions have been highlighted. First, thisissue explores CSR in terms of stakeholder accountability by considering both the scope ofreporting and the quality of stakeholder engagement (Guix et al., 2017; Ringham & Miles, 2018).Next, it analyses how CSR contributes to shareholder accountability (i.e. as financial performance)by developing a multiple attribute decision-making model to deploy CSR resources (Horng et al.,2017), analysing how CSR contributes to the management of systematic risk as part of an inter-nationalisation strategy (Jung et al., 2018); and showing how philanthropy is used as a legitimisa-tion tool (Wang et al., 2018). This special issue also reviews how managers negotiate CSRpriorities within their organisational strategy by accounting for the utility gained by family firmsfrom ecological and social outcomes in comparison with profit outcomes (Kallmuenzer et al.,2017), analysing the trade-offs of co-constructing a sustainability innovation (Buijtendijk et al.,2018) and weighting factors in water planning (Vila et al., 2018). Fourth, it reviews how employ-ees are central to the delivery of CSR actions by exploring how green organisational cultureaffects organisational citizenship behaviour (Zientara & Zamojska, 2016), how organisationalgreen practices impact an organisation’s image and its customers’ environmental consciousnessand behavioural intentions (Mart�ınez Garc�ıa de Leaniz et al., 2017); and how organisational CSRaffects employee pro-environmental citizenship and tourists’ pro-environmental citizenship (Tuan,2017). Finally, this special issue reviews the role of consumers in CSR with 10 strategies to closethe consumer’s attitude–behaviour gap (Moscardo & Hughes, 2018) and an account of how cus-tomers’ trust is a mediator between CSR, image and loyalty (Palacios-Florencio et al., 2018).


This emerging research on CSR in the context of tourism and hospitality is pushing past theboundaries of early approaches to corporate sustainability by providing empirical evidence tosupport the importance of integrating a range of stakeholder perspectives and needs throughoutthe planning, implementation, and evaluation of CSR initiatives. We have created Figure 2 todepict the various internal and external stakeholders that should are (or should be) involved inCSR at the level of the firm.

In the tourism and hospitality literature, internal stakeholders such as shareholders, employ-ees, and management and as well as external stakeholders such as consumers are the mainfocus of current and past on this topic. Other external stakeholders such as communities andecosystems are increasingly being addressed in the literature but more research is needed. Todate, the role of suppliers, governments, and NGOs have been largely overlooked. We encouragefuture research to focus on the role of some of these under-researched stakeholders. While tour-ism and hospitality may not be subject to the same pressures from these stakeholders as otherindustries, there remain valuable opportunities to engage these stakeholders in the journeytoward corporate sustainability and responsibility.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributors

Dr. Xavier Font is professor of sustainability marketing at the University of Surrey, and head of impact at Travindy(www.travindy.com), a web-based organisation helping the travel industry to understand the issues around tourismand sustainability and integrate them into their work. He has run over 100 training courses on sustainabilitymarketing to over 2500 delegates, and consulted for UNWTO, UNEP, EC, IFC, Rainforest Alliance and numerousgovernments and businesses. His research focuses on understanding reasons for pro-sustainability behaviour andmarket-based mechanisms to encourage sustainable production and consumption.

Dr. Jennifer Lynes is associate professor and director of Canada’s leading undergraduate program in environmentand business at the University of Waterloo. Her research focuses on the intersection of sustainability and marketing,particularly with respect to the live music industry. Her earlier research looked at corporate motivations for environ-mental commitment in the airline industry.

References

Aragon-Correa, J., Martin-Tapia, I., & de la Torre-Ruiz, J. (2015). Sustainability issues and hospitality and tourismfirms’ strategies: analytical review and future directions. International Journal of Contemporary HospitalityManagement, 27, 498–552. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-11-2014-0564.

Abaeian, V., Yeoh, K. K., & Khong, K. W. (2014). An exploration of CSR initiatives undertaken by Malaysian hotels:Underlying motivations from a managerial perspective. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 144, 423–432.doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.312.

Albus, H., & Ro, H. (2017). Corporate social responsibility: The effect of green practices in a service recovery. Journalof Hospitality & Tourism Research, 41, 41–65. doi:10.1177/1096348013515915.

Baker, M. A., Davis, E. A., & Weaver, P. A. (2014). Eco-friendly attitudes, barriers to participation, and differences inbehavior at green hotels. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 55, 89–99. doi:10.1177/1938965513504483.

Benavides-Velasco, C. A., Quintana-Garc�ıa, C., & Marchante-Lara, M. (2014). Total quality management, corporatesocial responsibility and performance in the hotel industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 41,77–87. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.05.003.

Bohdanowicz, P., & Zientara, P. (2008). Corporate social responsibility in hospitality: Issues and implications. A casestudy of Scandic. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 8, 271–293. doi:10.1080/15022250802504814.

Bohdanowicz, P., Zientara, P., & Novotna, E. (2011). International hotel chains and environmental protection: Ananalysis of Hilton's we care! programme (Europe, 2006–2008). Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19, 797–816.doi:10.1080/09669582.2010.549566.

Bonilla-Priego, M. J., Font, X., & Pacheco, R. (2014). Corporate sustainability reporting index and baseline data forthe cruise industry Tourism Management, 44, 149–160. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2014.03.004.


http://www.travindy.comhttps://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-11-2014-0564https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.312https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348013515915https://doi.org/10.1177/1938965513504483https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.05.003https://doi.org/10.1080/15022250802504814https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2010.549566https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2014.03.004

Buijtendijk, H., Blom, J., & Vermeer, J. (2018). Eco-innovation for sustainable tourism transitions as a process of col-laborative co-production: The case of a carbon management calculator for the Dutch travel industry. Journal ofSustainable Tourism, 1–19. doi:10.1080/09669582.2018.1433184.

Burns, P. M., & Cowlishaw, C. (2014). Climate change discourses: How UK airlines communicate their case to thepublic. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 22(5), 750–767. doi:10.1080/09669582.2014.884101.

Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility. Business & Society, 38, 268–295. doi:10.1177/000765039903800303.

Caruana, R., Glozer, S., Crane, A., & McCabe, S. (2014). Tourists’ accounts of responsible tourism. Annals of TourismResearch, 46, 115–129. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2014.03.006.

Chang, Y.-H., & Yeh, C.-H. (2016). Managing corporate social responsibility strategies of airports: The case ofTaiwan’s Taoyuan International Airport Corporation. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 92,338–348. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2016.06.015.

Chen, M.-H., & Lin, C.-P. (2015). The impact of corporate charitable giving on hospitality firm performance: Doingwell by doing good? International Journal of Hospitality Management, 47, 25–34. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2015.02.002.

Chou, C.-J. (2014). Hotels' environmental policies and employee personal environmental beliefs: Interactions andoutcomes. Tourism Management, 40, 436–446. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2013.08.001.

Coles, T., Fenclova, E., & Dinan, C. (2011). Responsibilities, recession and the tourism sector: Perspectives on CSRamong low-fares airlines during the economic downturn in the UK. Current Issues in Tourism, 14, 519–536.doi:10.1080/13683500.2010.544719.

Coles, T., Fenclova, E., & Dinan, C. (2014). Corporate social responsibility reporting among European low-fares air-lines: challenges for the examination and development of sustainable mobilities. Journal of Sustainable Tourism,22, 69–88. doi:10.1080/09669582.2013.790391.

Dahlsrud, A. (2008). How corporate social responsibility is defined: An analysis of 37 definitions. Corporate SocialResponsibility and Environmental Management, 15(1), 1–13. doi:10.1002/csr.132.

De Groot, J. I., & Steg, L. (2008). Value orientations to explain beliefs related to environmental significant behaviorhow to measure egoistic, altruistic, and biospheric value orientations. Environment and Behavior, 40, 330–354.doi:10.1177/0013916506297831.

de Grosbois, D. (2012). Corporate social responsibility reporting by the global hotel industry: Commitment, initiativesand performance. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31, 896–905. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.10.008.

Dodds, R., & Kuehnel, J. (2010). CSR among Canadian mass tour operators: good awareness but little action.International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 22, 221–244. doi:10.1108/09596111011018205El.

El Dief, M., & Font, X. (2011). Determinants of environmental management in the Red Sea Hotels: Personal andorganizational values and contextual variables. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 36, 115–137.doi:10.1177/1096348010388657.

Farrington, T., Curran, R., Gori, K., O’Gorman, K. D., & Queenan, C. J. (2017). Corporate social responsibility:Reviewed, rated, revised. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29, 30–47. doi:10.1177/1096348010388657.

Font, X., Elgammal, I., & Lamond, I. (2017). Greenhushing: The deliberate under communicating of sustainability practi-ces by tourism businesses. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 25, 1007–1023. doi:10.1080/09669582.2016.1158829.

Font, X., Garay, L., & Jones, S. (2016a). A social cognitive theory of sustainability empathy. Annals of TourismResearch, 58, 65–80. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2016.02.004.

Font, X., Garay, L., & Jones, S. (2016b). Sustainability motivations and practices in small tourism enterprises. Journalof Cleaner Production, 137, 1439–1448. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.071s.

Font, X., Guix, M., & Bonilla-Priego, M. J. (2016). Corporate social responsibility in cruising: Using materiality analysisto create shared value. Tourism Management, 53, 175–186. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2015.10.007.

Font, X., & Harris, C. (2004). Rethinking labels: From green to sustainable. Annals of Tourism Research, 31, 986–1007.doi:10.1016/j.annals.2004.04.001.

Font, X., & McCabe, S. (2017). Sustainability and marketing in tourism: Its contexts, paradoxes, approaches, chal-lenges and potential. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 25, 869–883. doi:10.1080/09669582.2017.1301721.

Font, X., Walmsley, A., Cogotti, S., McCombes, L., & H€ausler, N. (2012). Corporate social responsibility: The disclosur-e–performance gap. Tourism Management, 33, 1544–1553. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2012.02.012.

Frey, N., & George, R. (2010). Responsible tourism management: The missing link between business owners' attitudes andbehaviour in the Cape Town tourism industry. Tourism Management, 31, 621–628. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2009.06.017.

Fu, H., Ye, B. H., & Law, R. (2014). You do well and I do well? The behavioral consequences of corporate socialresponsibility. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 40, 62–70. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.03.004.

Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits, New York Times, New York TimesArchives, 17.

Garay, L., & Font, X. (2012). Doing good to do well? Corporate social responsibility reasons, practices and impactsin small and medium accommodation enterprises. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31, 328–336.doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.04.013.


https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2018.1433184https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2014.884101https://doi.org/10.1177/000765039903800303https://doi.org/10.1177/000765039903800303https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2014.03.006https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2016.06.015https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2015.02.002https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.08.001https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2010.544719https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2013.790391https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.132https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916506297831https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.10.008https://doi.org/10.1108/09596111011018205Elhttps://doi.org/10.1177/1096348010388657https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348010388657https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348010388657https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2016.1158829https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2016.02.004https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.071shttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2015.10.007https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2004.04.001https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2017.1301721https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.02.012https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.06.017https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.03.004https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.04.013

Garay, L., & Font, X. (2013). Corporate social responsibility in tourism small and medium enterprises. Evidence fromEurope and Latin America. Tourism Management Perspectives, 7, 38–46. doi:10.1016/j.tmp.2013.03.002.

Garriga, E., & Mel�e, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of BusinessEthics, 53, 51–71. doi:10.1023/B:BUSI.0000039399.90587.34.

Geerts, W. (2014). Environmental certification schemes: Hotel managers’ views and perceptions. InternationalJournal of Hospitality Management, 39, 87–96. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.02.007.

Guix, M., Bonilla-Priego, M. J., & Font, X. (2017). The process of sustainability reporting in international hotel groups:An analysis of stakeholder inclusiveness, materiality and responsiveness. Journal of Sustainable Tourism,doi:10.1080/09669582.09662017.01410164

Hahn, T., Figge, F., Pinkse, J., & Preuss, L. (2010). Trade-offs in corporate sustainability: You can't have your cake andeat it. Business Strategy and The Environment, 19, 217–229. doi:10.1002/bse.674.

Holcomb, J. L., Upchurch, R. S., & Okumus, F. (2007). Corporate social responsibility: What are top hotel companies report-ing? International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 19, 461–475. doi:10.1108/09596110710775129.

Horng, J.-S., Hsu, H., & Tsai, C.-Y. (2017). An assessment model of corporate social responsibility practice in the tour-ism industry. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1–20. doi:10.1080/09669582.2017.1388384.

Husted, B. W., & Allen, D. B. (2007). Strategic corporate social responsibility and value creation among large firms:Lessons from the Spanish experience. Long Range Planning, 40, 594–610. doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2007.07.001.

Ilkhanizadeh, S., & Karatepe, O. M. (2017). An examination of the consequences of corporate social responsibility inthe airline industry: Work engagement, career satisfaction, and voice behavior. Journal of Air TransportManagement, 59, 8–17. doi:10.1016/j.jairtraman.2016.11.002.

Inoue, Y., & Lee, S. (2011). Effects of different dimensions of corporate social responsibility on corporate financialperformance in tourism-related industries. Tourism Management, 32, 790–804. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2010.06.019.

Jarvis, D., Stoeckl, N., & Liu, H.-B. (2016). The impact of economic, social and environmental factors on trip satisfac-tion and the likelihood of visitors returning. Tourism Management, 52, 1–18. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2015.06.003.

Jones, P., Hillier, D., & Comfort, D. (2014). Sustainability in the global hotel industry. International Journal ofContemporary Hospitality Management, 26, 5–17. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-10-2012-0180.

Jones, P., Hillier, D., & Comfort, D. (2016). Sustainability in the hospitality industry: Some personal reflections on cor-porate challenges and research agendas. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28,36–67. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-11-2014-0572.

Jung, S., Jung, S., Lee, S., Lee, S., Dalbor, M., & Dalbor, M. (2016). The negative synergistic effect of internationaliza-tion and corporate social responsibility on US restaurant firms’ value performance. International Journal ofContemporary Hospitality Management, 28, 1759–1777. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-07-2014-0361.

Jung, S., Kim, J. H., Kang, K. H., & Kim, B. (2018). Internationalization and corporate social responsibility in the res-taurant industry: Risk perspective. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1–19. doi:10.1080/09669582.2017.1421201.

Kallmuenzer, A., Nikolakis, W., Peters, M., & Zanon, J. (2017). Trade-offs between dimensions of sustainability:Exploratory evidence from family firms in rural tourism regions. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1–18.doi:10.1080/09669582.2017.1374962.

Kang, K. H., Lee, S., & Hug, C. (2010). Impacts of positive and negative corporate social responsibility activities oncompany performance in the hospitality industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 29, 72–82.doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2009.05.006.

Kasim, A., Gursoy, D., Okumus, F., & Wong, A. (2014). The importance of water management in hotels: A framework forsustainability through innovation. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 22, 1090–1107. doi:10.1080/09669582.2013.873444.

Kim, E., & Ham, S. (2016). Restaurants’ disclosure of nutritional information as a corporate social responsibility initia-tive: Customers’ attitudinal and behavioral responses. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 55,96–106. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.02.002.

Kim, M., & Kim, Y. (2014). Corporate social responsibility and shareholder value of restaurant firms. InternationalJournal of Hospitality Management, 40, 120–129. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.03.006.

Kim, S.-B., & Kim, D.-Y. (2014). The effects of message framing and source credibility on green messages in hotels.Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 55, 64–75. doi:10.1177/1938965513503400.

Kim, Y., Kim, M., & Mattila, A. S. (2017). Corporate social responsibility and equity-holder risk in the hospitalityindustry. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 58, 81–93. doi:10.1177/1938965516649052.

Kim, H. L., Rhou, Y., Uysal, M., & Kwon, N. (2017). An examination of the links between corporate social responsibil-ity (CSR) and its internal consequences. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 61, 26–34. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.10.011.

Lee, S., & Heo, C. Y. (2009). Corporate social responsibility and customer satisfaction among US publicly traded hotelsand restaurants. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 28, 635–637. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2009.02.007.

Lee, Y.-K., Lee, K. H., & Li, D.-x. (2012). The impact of CSR on relationship quality and relationship outcomes: A per-spective of service employees. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31, 745–756. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.09.011.

Lee, S., & Park, S. Y. (2009). Do socially responsible activities help hotels and casinos achieve their financial goals?International Journal of Hospitality Management, 28, 105–112. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2008.06.003.


https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2013.03.002https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000039399.90587.34https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.02.007https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.09662017.01410164https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.674https://doi.org/10.1108/09596110710775129https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2017.1388384https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2007.07.001https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2016.11.002https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2010.06.019https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2015.06.003https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-10-2012-0180https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-11-2014-0572https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-07-2014-0361https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2017.1421201https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2017.1374962https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2009.05.006https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2013.873444https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.02.002https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.03.006https://doi.org/10.1177/1938965513503400https://doi.org/10.1177/1938965516649052https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.10.011https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.10.011https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2009.02.007https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.09.011https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.09.011https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2008.06.003

Lee, S., Singal, M., & Kang, K. H. (2013). The corporate social responsibility – Financial performance link in the USrestaurant industry: Do economic conditions matter? International Journal of Hospitality Management, 32, 2–10.doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.03.007.

Leonidou, L. C., Leonidou, C. N., Fotiadis, T. A., & Zeriti, A. (2012). Resources and capabilities as drivers of hotelenvironmental marketing strategy: Implications for competitive advantage and performance. TourismManagement, 35, 94–110. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2012.06.003.

Leung, T. C. H., & Snell, R. S. (2017). Attraction or distraction? Corporate social responsibility in Macao’s gamblingindustry. Journal of business ethics, 145, 637–658. doi:10.1007/s10551-015-2890-z.

Levy, S. E., & Park, S.-Y. (2011). An analysis of CSR activities in the lodging industry. Journal of Hospitality andTourism Management, 18, 147–154. doi:10.1375/jhtm.18.1.147.

Li, Y., Fang, S., & Huan, T.-C. T. (2017). Consumer response to discontinuation of corporate social responsibility activ-ities of hotels. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 64, 41–50. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.04.001.

Lin, L.-P. L., Yu, C.-Y., & Chang, F.-C. (2018). Determinants of CSER practices for reducing greenhouse gas emissions:From the perspectives of administrative managers in tour operators. Tourism Management, 64, 1–12.

Line, N. D., Hanks, L., & Zhang, L. (2016). Sustainability communication: The effect of message construals on con-sumers’ attitudes towards green restaurants. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 57, 143–151.doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.07.001.

Lynes, J. K., & Andrachuk, M. (2008). Motivations for corporate social and environmental responsibility: A case studyof Scandinavian Airlines. Journal of International management, 14, 377–390. doi:10.1016/j.intman.2007.09.004.

Mackenzie, M., & Peters, M. (2014). Hospitality managers' perception of corporate social responsibility: An explora-tive study. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 19, 257–272. doi:10.1080/10941665.2012.742915.

Mart�ınez Garc�ıa de Leaniz, P., Herrero Crespo, �A., & G�omez L�opez, R. (2017). Customer responses to environmentallycertified hotels: The moderating effect of environmental consciousness on the formation of behavioral inten-tions. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1–18. doi:10.1080/09669582.2017.1349775.

Mart�ınez Garc�ıa de Leaniz, P., & Rodr�ıguez Del Bosque Rodr�ıguez, I. (2015). Exploring the antecedents of hotel cus-tomer loyalty: A social identity perspective. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 24(1), 1–23.doi:10.1080/19368623.2014.891961.

Mart�ınez, P., P�erez, A., & del Bosque, I. R. (2014). CSR influence on hotel brand image and loyalty. Academia RevistaLatinoamericana de Administraci�on, 27, 267–283. doi:10.1108/ARLA-12-2013-0190.

Mart�ınez, P., P�erez, A., & Rodr�ıguez del Bosque, I. (2013). Measuring corporate social responsibility in tourism:Development and validation of an efficient measurement scale in the hospitality industry. Journal of Travel &Tourism Marketing, 30, 365–385. doi:10.1080/10548408.2013.784154.

Mart�ınez, P., P�erez, A., & Rodr�ıguez del Bosque, I. (2014). Exploring the role of CSR in the organizational identity ofhospitality companies: A case from the Spanish tourism industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 124, 47–66.doi:10.1007/s10551-013-1857-1.

Mart�ınez, P., & Rodr�ıguez del Bosque, I. (2013). CSR and customer loyalty: The roles of trust, customer identificationwith the company and satisfaction. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 35, 89–99. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.05.009.

McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy ofManagement Review, 26, 117–127. doi:10.5465/AMR.2001.4011987.

Melissen, F., van Ginneken, R., & Wood, R. C. (2016). Sustainability challenges and opportunities arising from theowner–operator split in hotels. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 54, 35–42. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.01.005.

Merwe, M., & Wocke, A. (2007). An investigation into responsible tourism practices in the South African hotel indus-try. South African Journal of Business Management, 38(2), 1–15.

Miao, L., & Wei, W. (2013). Consumers’ pro-environmental behavior and the underlying motivations: A comparisonbetween household and hotel settings. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 32, 102–112.doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.04.008.

Miller, G. (2001). Corporate responsibility in the UK tourism industry. Tourism Management, 22, 589–598.doi:10.1016/S0261-5177(01)00034-6.

Mody, M., Day, J., Sydnor, S., Lehto, X., & Jaff�e, W. (2017). Integrating country and brand images: Using the prod-uct—Country image framework to understand travelers' loyalty towards responsible tourism operators. TourismManagement Perspectives, 24, 139–150. doi:10.1016/j.tmp.2017.08.001.

Moscardo, G., & Hughes, K. (2018). All aboard! Strategies for engaging guests in corporate responsibility pro-grammes. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1–16. doi:10.1016/j.tmp.2017.08.001.

Nicolau, J. L. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: worth-creating activities. Annals of Tourism Research, 35,990–1006. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2008.09.003.

Paek, S., Xiao, Q., Lee, S., & Song, H. (2013). Does managerial ownership affect different corporate social responsibil-ity dimensions? An empirical examination of US publicly traded hospitality firms. International Journal ofHospitality Management, 34, 423–433. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.12.004.


https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.03.007https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.06.003https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2890-zhttps://doi.org/10.1375/jhtm.18.1.147https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.04.001https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.07.001https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2007.09.004https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2012.742915https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2017.1349775https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2014.891961https://doi.org/10.1108/ARLA-12-2013-0190https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2013.784154https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1857-1https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.05.009https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.05.009https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2001.4011987https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.01.005https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.01.005https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.04.008https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5177(01)00034-6https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2017.08.001https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2017.08.001https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2008.09.003https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.12.004

Palacios-Florencio, B., Garc�ıa del Junco, J., Castellanos-Verdugo, M., & Rosa-D�ıaz, I. M. (2018). Trust as mediator ofcorporate social responsibility, image and loyalty in the hotel sector. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1–17.doi:10.1080/09669582.2018.1447944.

Park, S.-Y., & E. Levy, S. (2014). Corporate social responsibility: Perspectives of hotel frontline employees.International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 26, 332–348. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-01-2013-0034.

Park, S., Song, S., & Lee, S. (2017). Corporate social responsibility and systematic risk of restaurant firms: The moder-ating role of geographical diversification. Tourism Management, 59, 610–620. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2016.09.016.

Pereira-Moliner, J., Claver-Cort�es, E., Molina-Azor�ın, J. F., & Tar�ı, J. J. (2012). Quality management, environmentalmanagement and firm performance: Direct and mediating effects in the hotel industry. Journal of CleanerProduction, 37, 82–92. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.06.010.

Pereira-Moliner, J., Font, X., Molina-Azor�ın, J. F., Lopez-Gamero, M. D., Tar�ı, J. J., & Pertusa-Ortega, E. (2015). TheHoly Grail: Environmental management, competitive advantage and business performance in the Spanish hotelindustry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 27, 714–738. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-12-2013-0559.

Perez, A., & Rodr�ıguez Del Bosque, I. (2014). Sustainable development and stakeholder relations management:Exploring sustainability reporting in the hospitality industry from a SD-SRM approach. International Journal ofHospitality Management, 42, 174–187. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.07.003.

P�erez, A., & Rodriguez del Bosque, I. (2015). Corporate social responsibility and customer loyalty: Exploring the roleof identification, satisfaction and type of company. Journal of Services Marketing, 29, 15–25. doi:10.1108/JSM-10-2013-0272.

Perrini, F. (2006). SMEs and CSR theory: Evidence and implications from an Italian perspective. Journal of BusinessEthics, 67, 305–316. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9186-2.

Prud’homme, B., & Raymond, L. (2013). Sustainable development practices in the hospitality industry: An empiricalstudy of their impact on customer satisfaction and intentions. International Journal of Hospitality Management,34, 116–126. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.03.003.

Quintana-Garc�ıa, C., Marchante-Lara, M., & Benavides-Chic�on, C. G. (2017). Social responsibility and total quality inthe hospitality industry: Does gender matter? Journal of Sustainable Tourism. doi:10.1080/09669582.2017.1401631.

Rahman, I., Park, J., & Chi, C. G.-q. (2015). Consequences of “greenwashing” consumers’ reactions to hotels’ greeninitiatives. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 27, 1054–1081. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-04-2014-0202.

Rahman, I., Reynolds, D., & Svaren, S. (2012). How “green” are North American hotels? An exploration of low-costadoption practices. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31, 720–727. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.09.008.

Raub, S., & Blunschi, S. (2014). The power of meaningful work: How awareness of CSR initiatives fosters task signifi-cance and positive work outcomes in service employees. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 55, 10–18. doi:10.1177/1938965513498300.

Ringham, K., & Miles, S. (2018). The boundary of corporate social responsibility reporting: The case of the airlineindustry. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1–20. doi:10.1080/09669582.2017.1423317.

Schultz, P. W. (2001). The structure of environmental concern: Concern for self, other people, and the biosphere.Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, 327–339. doi:10.1006/jevp.2001.0227.

Seo, K., Moon, J., & Lee, S. (2015). Synergy of corporate social responsibility and service quality for airlines: Themoderating role of carrier type. Journal of Air Transport Management, 47, 126–134. doi:10.1016/j.jairtraman.2015.05.011.

Sheldon, P. J., & Park, S.-Y. (2011). An exploratory study of corporate social responsibility in the US travel industry.Journal of Travel Research, 50, 392–407. doi:10.1177/0047287510371230.

Singal, M. (2014). Corporate social responsibility in the hospitality and tourism industry: Do family control andfinancial condition matter? International Journal of Hospitality Management, 36, 81–89. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.08.002.

Siu, N. Y.-M., Zhang, T. J.-F., & Kwan, H.-Y. (2014). Effect of corporate social responsibility, customer attribution andprior expectation on post-recovery satisfaction. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 43, 87–97.doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.08.007.

Smith, R. A., & Ong, J. L. T. (2015). Corporate social responsibility and the operationalization challenge for globaltourism organizations. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 20, 487–499. doi:10.1080/10941665.2014.918555.

Su, L., Pan, Y., & Chen, X. (2017). Corporate social responsibility: Findings from the Chinese hospitality industry.Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 34, 240–247. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.10.013.

Su, L., & Swanson, S. R. (2017). The effect of destination social responsibility on tourist environmentally responsiblebehavior: Compared analysis of first-time and repeat tourists. Tourism Management, 60, 308–321. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2016.12.011.

Theodoulidis, B., Diaz, D., Crotto, F., & Rancati, E. (2017). Exploring corporate social responsibility and financial per-formance through stakeholder theory in the tourism industries. Tourism Management, 62, 173–188. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2017.03.018.


https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2018.1447944https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-01-2013-0034https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.09.016https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.06.010https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-12-2013-0559https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-12-2013-0559https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.07.003https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-10-2013-0272https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-10-2013-0272https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9186-2https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.03.003https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2017.1401631https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2017.1401631https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-04-2014-0202https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-04-2014-0202https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.09.008https://doi.org/10.1177/1938965513498300https://doi.org/10.1177/1938965513498300https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2017.1423317https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.2001.0227https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2015.05.011https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2015.05.011https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287510371230https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.08.002https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.08.002https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.08.007https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2014.918555https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.10.013https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.12.011https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.12.011https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2017.03.018https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2017.03.018

T€olkes, C. (2018). Sustainability communication in tourism – A literature review. Tourism Management Perspectives,27, 10–21. doi:10.1016/j.tmp.2018.04.002.

Truong, V. D., & Hall, C. M. (2017). Corporate social marketing in tourism: To sleep or not to sleep with the enemy?Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 25, 884902. doi:10.1080/09669582.2016.1201093.

Tsai, W. H., Hsu, J. L., Chen, C. H., Lin, W. R., & Chen, S. P. (2010). An integrated approach for selecting corporatesocial responsibility programs and costs evaluation in the international tourist hotel. International Journal ofHospitality Management, 31(4), 1143–1154.

Tsai, H., Tsang, N. K., & Cheng, S. K. (2012). Hotel employees’ perceptions on corporate social responsibility: Thecase of Hong Kong. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31, 1143–1154.

Tuan, L. T. (2017). Activating tourists' citizenship behavior for the environment: The roles of CSR and frontlineemployees' citizenship behavior for the environment. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1–26. doi:10.1080/09669582.2017.1330337.

Vila, M., Afsordegan, A., Agell, N., S�anchez, M., & Costa, G. (2018). Influential factors in water planning for sustain-able tourism destinations. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1–16. doi:10.1080/09669582.2018.1433183.

Villarino, J., & Font, X. (2015). Sustainability marketing myopia: the lack of persuasiveness in sustainability communi-cation Journal of Vacation Marketing, 21, 326–335. doi:10.1177/1356766715589428.

Watson, B. (2016). The Troubling Evolution of Corporate Greenwashing. The Guardian. 20 Aug. Accessed at: https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2016/aug/20/greenwashing-environmentalism-lies-companies.

Wang, C.-J. (2014). Do ethical and sustainable practices matter? Effects of corporate citizenship on business per-formance in the hospitality industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 26, 930–947.doi:10.1108/IJCHM-01-2013-0001.

Wang, C., Xu, H., & Li, G. (2018). The corporate philanthropy and legitimacy strategy of tourism firms: A communityperspective. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1–18. doi:10.1080/09669582.2018.1428334.

Weaver, D. B. (2014). Asymmetrical dialectics of sustainable tourism: Toward enlightened mass tourism. Journal ofTravel Research, 53, 131–140. doi:10.1177/0047287513491335.

Wells, V. K., Manika, D., Gregory-Smith, D., Taheri, B., & McCowlen, C. (2015). Heritage tourism, CSR and the role ofemployee environmental behaviour. Tourism Management, 48, 399–413. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2014.12.015.

Wells, V. K., Smith, D. G., Taheri, B., Manika, D., & McCowlen, C. (2016). An exploration of CSR development in heri-tage tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 58, 1–17. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2016.01.007.

Whitfield, J., & Dioko, L. A. (2012). Measuring and examining the relevance of discretionary corporate social respon-sibility in tourism: Some preliminary evidence from the UK conference sector. Journal of Travel Research, 51,289–302. doi:10.1177/0047287511418369.

Wong, I. A., & Gao, H. J. (2014). Exploring the direct and indirect effects of CSR on organizational commitment: Themediating role of corporate culture. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 26, 500–525.doi:10.1108/IJCHM-05-2013-0225.

Xie, C., Bagozzi, R. P., & Grønhaug, K. (2015). The role of moral emotions and individual differences in consumerresponses to corporate green and non-green actions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43, 333–356.doi:10.1007/s11747-014-0394-5.

Xu, X., & Gursoy, D. (2015). A conceptual framework of sustainable hospitality supply chain management. Journal ofHospitality Marketing & Management, 24, 229–259. doi:10.1080/19368623.2014.909691.

Youn, H., Hua, N., & Lee, S. (2015). Does size matter? Corporate social responsibility and firm performance in therestaurant industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 51, 127–134. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2015.09.008.

Zhang, L. (2014). How effective are your CSR messages? The moderating role of processing fluency and construallevel. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 41, 56–62. doi:10.1108/09564231211248462.

Zhang, J. J., Joglekar, N., & Verma, R. (2012). Pushing the frontier of sustainable service operations management:Evidence from US hospitality industry. Journal of Service Management, 23, 377–399. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.04.005.

Zientara, P., & Zamojska, A. (2016). Green organizational climates and employee pro-environmental behaviour inthe hotel industry. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1–18. doi:10.1080/09669582.2016.1206554.

Xavier FontSchool of Hospitality and Tourism Management, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK

Jennifer LynesSchool of Environment, Enterprise and Development, University of Waterloo,

Waterloo, ON, [email protected]


https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2018.04.002https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2016.1201093https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2017.1330337https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2017.1330337https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2018.1433183https://doi.org/10.1177/1356766715589428https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2016/aug/20/greenwashing-environmentalism-lies-companieshttps://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2016/aug/20/greenwashing-environmentalism-lies-companieshttps://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-01-2013-0001https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2018.1428334https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287513491335https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2014.12.015https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2016.01.007https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287511418369https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-05-2013-0225https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0394-5https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2014.909691https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2015.09.008https://doi.org/10.1108/09564231211248462https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.04.005https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.04.005https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2016.1206554

AbstractIntroductionOverview of the literatureSociety: stakeholder accountabilityShareholders: the quest for corporate financial performanceManagement: CSR, strategy and organisational cultureEmployees: CSR and human resources managementConsumers: marketing and communication

ConclusionsDisclosure statementNotes on contributorsReferences

Corporate social responsibility in tourism and hospitality...EDITORIAL Corporate social...

Documents

Transcript of Corporate social responsibility in tourism and hospitality...EDITORIAL Corporate social...